Kerala High Court
WP(C)/44299/2023 of P.V GEORGE Vs RANNY PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD on 29 December 2023
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 8TH POUSHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 44299 OF 2023 PETITIONER: P.V GEORGE, AGED 86 YEARS, S/O VARGHESE, RESIDING AT MADATHIL PUTHEN VEEDU, KEEKOZHOOR, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN –
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 29[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 8TH POUSHA, 1945WP(C) NO. 44299 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
P.V GEORGE, AGED 86 YEARS, S/O VARGHESE, RESIDING AT MADATHIL PUTHEN VEEDU, KEEKOZHOOR, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN – 689 672BY ADVS.G.RAJAN POTAYILYAMUNA RANI V.G.SUJA PADNABAN PILLAI
RESPONDENT:
RANNY PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD, NO.P.T 232, PAZHAVANGADI, RANNY, PATHANAMTHITTA , REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN – 689 673
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FORADMISSION ON 29.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAYDELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner, a senior citizen, isaggrieved by the steps taken by the respondent-bank coercing the petitioner to vacate thepremises, which was offered as a security for aloan availed by the petitioner's daughter, towhich transaction, the petitioner was the co-obligant. The petitioner would point out thatExts.P1 and P2 notices are bereft of anyparticulars as to the amount outstanding, or evenin respect of the property which is sought to beproceeded against for the recovery of the loan. 2.Learned counsel for the petitioner wouldsubmit that the Bank officials are threateningthe petitioner to vacate the premises which hasbeen offered as a security and he is under thethreat of dispossession, otherwise than inaccordance with law.
WP(C) NO. 44299 OF 2023
..3..
3. Having regard to the limited reliefsought for by the petitioner, this Court is ofthe opinion that notice to the respondent is notstrictly necessary. Accordingly, there will bean order directing the respondent-bank not toevict the petitioner from the premises, which hasbeen offered as a security for the loan,otherwise than in accordance with law.
This writ petition is disposed of as above.
PR
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN
JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 44299/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1
: THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. 1323/22-23/ AR 8620 DATED NIL TOGETHERWITH ANNEXURE OF MODEL OF NOTIFICATIONISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK
Exhibit P2
THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO. 470/23-24/ AR 8620 DATED NIL TOGETHER WITH ANNEXURE OF MODEL OF NOTIFICATIONISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT BANK
Exhibit P3
: THE TRUE COPY OF THE OP TICKET NO. 64661 DATED 14/12/2022 ISSUED BY MCCM GOVT. TALUK HOSPITAL, RANNY
Exhibit P4
THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.6150060 DATED 12.01.2023 ISSUED BY M/S MALAYALA MANORAMA